UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-2225
ZHENLU ZHANG,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, (STC),
Defendant - Appellee,
and
COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION, (CSC),
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge.
(8:04-cv-00434-DKC)
Submitted: February 22, 2007 Decided: February 27, 2007
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Zhenlu Zhang, Appellant Pro Se. Henry Adam Platt, J.C. Miller,
SCHMELTZER, APTAKER & SHEPARD, P.C., Washington, D.C.; Edward Lee
Isler, Steven William Ray, ISLER, DARE, RAY & RADCLIFFE, P.C.,
Vienna, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Zhenlu Zhang seeks to appeal the district court’s order
awarding attorney fees and costs. We dismiss the appeal for lack
of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the
district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R.
App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal
period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period
under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory
and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S.
257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220,
229 (1960)).
The district court’s order was entered on the docket on
September 28, 2006. The notice of appeal was received by the
district court on October 31, 2006. Because Zhang failed to file
a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of
the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 3 -